REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Nah, there's no wealth gap...

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Friday, December 2, 2011 04:58
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 832
PAGE 1 of 1

Wednesday, November 30, 2011 7:06 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

Millions of American families have slipped into what the U.S. Census Bureau defines as poor. About 46.2 million people are considered to be living in poverty, 2.6 million more than last year.
.....
There haven't been this many Americans living in poverty since 1993, according to the Census Bureau.

More than 15% of the population is now considered poor. The rate is 22% for children, meaning at least one of every five U.S. kids is living in poverty.

"If you qualify as being in poverty today, then you're really in deep poverty," said Mark Bergel, founder and executive director of A Wider Circle, a Maryland-based charity that provides furniture and other basic necessities to needy families.

Bergel told CNN's Lisa Sylvester that the numbers used to define poverty today are extremely low and "based on an outdated formula from the '60s."

The Census Bureau defines an individual as poor if they make less than $11,139 a year. The dollar amount rises for every member added to the household. http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/29/us/cnnheroes-usa-poverty/index.html?hpt=
hp_bn2

Thank you, 1%, Wall Street and your Republican tools. Oh, and the politicians you used the Tea Party to put in office nationwide. 'Ya done good!




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 30, 2011 8:21 AM

CHRISISALL


Kudos politicians! You guys stuck to your guns & got results!


The laughing Chrisisall


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 30, 2011 8:32 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I'm surprised to learn the poverty line is set at such a low figure. It's scarcely possible to pay for housing and utilities with such low wages. I feel you could probably increase the figure by half or more and still consider an individual to be living on the edge of life and death.

--Anthony


_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 30, 2011 8:49 AM

STORYMARK


But, but.... they have refrigerators - clearly they're not that poor.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 30, 2011 9:09 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


And every "poor" household in the hood has a satellite dish, or cable.

Also, everywhere you look, "poor" people are driving Hummers, Bimmers, and God knows what else.

Maybe its poor choices that make (and keep) people "poor".

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 30, 2011 9:38 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello Wulf,

First, you are wrong. Not every poor household has a satellite dish or cable. About 2% of households don't even have televisions. In some cities, over 50% of the people don't own a car. (Including poor people!) So your sweeping generalizations are incorrect. It's like seeing a flock of bluejays and assuming all birds are blue.

Second, we are discussing 'poor' as an income threshold. Which has nothing to do with Humvees or Cable, and everything to do with how much money you need to provide food, shelter, utilities, clothing, medicine, and transportation for an individual. Maybe some people choose to spend their shelter money on car rims or cocaine, but that doesn't make them any more or less poor from an income threshold perspective. The income threshold definition of poverty should center on how much money you need to provide the basics of life, not whether or not you actually choose to do so.

--Anthony


_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 30, 2011 10:12 AM

FREMDFIRMA



It's a shell game, Anthony.

Politicians keep reducing the number, and then using the now-modified figures to SAY they've reduced poverty, while shelling propaganda bullshit stories to useful idiots like Wulfie who parrot them wholesale cause believing that bullshit allows them to self-absolve the guilt of contributing to a system that pauperizes other people.

Yeah, you DO see people with nice stuff in the hood, the dope dealers, chickenhawks, gun runners, the additional predators drawn to the dying like jackals, providing in a sense the only escape most of those poor bastards are ever gonna have.

But no one wants to face up to the ugly realities of the situation no, they just wanna squeeze more and more and more, and so we have come to this...

And it's not too far down THAT road till some of those people start mortaging all they have left for weapons and the hope to use them on the bastards who run a system that never let them get a leg up, cause that's really all they got left.
You take away peoples options, take away all hope of improvement or even holding their own ground, they WILL do some nasty things, this is inevitable.

Oh, and don't shine me about choices - I ask to anyone else who's actually managed the miracle of climbing out of that hell...
What scars do YOU carry, on your body and soul, as a result - how many ghosts of the past visit YOU in the wee hours of the night when the wolf of conscience sinks its teeth into you hard ?
Don't talk to me about choices when we're talkin about people who ain't got no pretty ones left.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 30, 2011 10:13 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
And every "poor" household in the hood has a satellite dish, or cable.




Which of course you can back up, and isn't just yet another bullshit generalization, right?

Don't bother - everyone knows the answer. The village idiot don't do facts.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 1, 2011 8:13 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Well, I was going to ask about that, but you two covered it nicely. I will add that, when poverty becomes a serious affair, people SELL those things to survive, so the government's "figures" about what things poor people own is not only out of date, but doesn't talk about repairing such things when they get old (which many can't afford to do) or whether some of those things have been sold to buy food.

You can spout stuff any time you wish, but nobody will take you seriously unless you offer VALID proof of your statements.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 2, 2011 4:17 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


It appears that poverty levels have been stable at between 12% and 15% since the mid 1960s.



The number in poverty has gone up, but then so has the general population.

This is not to say that the poverty rate isn't too high, or that folks aren't suffering, but that there's not been that significant an increase recently.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 2, 2011 4:43 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


"This is not to say that the poverty rate isn't too high, or that folks aren't suffering, but that there's not been that significant an increase recently."

Hello,

Based on the threshold provided for 'poverty' I wouldn't expect a huge increase. In fact, I would posit that the threshold is set where it is precisely to avoid any apparent increase. It certainly isn't based on the cost of living in our society.

--Anthony


_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 2, 2011 4:49 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
And every "poor" household in the hood has a satellite dish, or cable.

Also, everywhere you look, "poor" people are driving Hummers, Bimmers, and God knows what else.

Maybe its poor choices that make (and keep) people "poor".





It's true. Drive by any low rent apt. complex, and you'll see a garden of satellite dishes on every porch. Even though you can get digital t.v. for free in this town, for the price of 1 cheap antenna, so many CHOOSE to pay that monthly t.v. bill , where otherwise they could be saving that $, spending it on food, clothes, shoes...

Poverty is, more often than not, a choice. The choice an individual makes for them self.



"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 2, 2011 4:50 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


By the way, Wulf, you might note that around here, just about any apartment you get comes with cable; you pay for it whether you use it or not, whether you want it or not. And yes, even the low-rent housing.

I'm still waiting on the proof of the "Hummers", etc. I never saw a poor person driving an expensive car, so I'd love some backup on that.

Uhhh, Geezer, the very article you pulled that from in Wikipedia states:
Quote:

Poverty is defined as the state of one who lacks a usual or socially acceptable amount of money or material possessions.[1] According to the U.S. Census Bureau data released Tuesday September 13th, 2011, the nation's poverty rate rose to 15.1% (46.2 million) in 2010,[2] up from 14.3% (approximately 43.6 million) in 2009 and to its highest level since 1993. In 2008, 13.2% (39.8 million) Americans lived in relative poverty.[3]

The government's definition of poverty is not tied to an absolute value of how much an individual or family can afford, but is tied to a relative level based on total income received. For example, the poverty level for 2011 was set at $22,350 (total yearly income) for a family of four.[4] Most Americans (58.5%) will spend at least one year below the poverty line at some point between ages 25 and 75.[5] There remains some controversy over whether the official poverty threshold over- or understates poverty.

The most common measure of poverty in the United States is the "poverty threshold" set by the U.S. government. This measure recognizes poverty as a lack of those goods and services commonly taken for granted by members of mainstream society.[6] The official threshold is adjusted for inflation using the consumer price index.

Relative poverty describes how income relates to the median income, and does not imply that the person is lacking anything. In general the United States has some of the highest relative poverty rates among industrialized countries.[7] According to a 2008 report released by the Carsey Institute at the University of New Hampshire, on average, rates of poverty are persistently higher in rural and inner city parts of the country as compared to suburban areas.[8][9] The number of people in the U.S. who are in poverty is increasing to record levels with the ranks of working-age poor approaching 1960s levels that led to the national war on poverty.

In other words, they change the poverty "LEVEL"...so that it appears there are fewer "poor" by the government's definition than there actually are. Yes, they say they change it according to "inflation", but if you believe that, you trust your government too much.

For example:
Quote:

In recent years, there have been a number of concerns raised about the official U.S. poverty measure. In 1995, the National Research Council's Committee on National Statistics convened a panel on measuring poverty. The findings of the panel were that "the official poverty measure in the United States is flawed and does not adequately inform policy-makers or the public about who is poor and who is not poor."

The panel was chaired by Robert Michael, former Dean of the Harris School of the University of Chicago. According to Michael, the official U.S. poverty measure "has not kept pace with far-reaching changes in society and the economy."

Many sociologists and government officials have argued that poverty in the United States is understated, meaning that there are more households living in actual poverty than there are households below the poverty threshold.[47] A recent NPR report states that as much as 30% of Americans have trouble making ends meet and other advocates have made supporting claims that the rate of actual poverty in the US is far higher than that calculated by using the poverty threshold.[47] While the poverty threshold is updated for inflation every year, the basket of goods used to determine what constitutes being deprived of a socially acceptable miniumum standard of living has not been updated since 1955. As a result, the current poverty line only takes goods into account that were common more than 50 years ago, updating their cost using the Consumer Price Index. Mollie Orshansky, who devised the original goods basket and methodology to measure poverty, used by the U.S. government, in 1963-65, updated the goods basket in 2000, finding that the actual poverty threshold, i.e. the point where a person is excluded from the nation's prevailing consumption patterns, is at roughly 170% of the official poverty threshold.[6] According to John Schwarzt, a political scientist at the University of Arizona:

“ The official poverty line today is essentially what it takes in today's dollars, adjusted for inflation, to purchase the same poverty-line level of living that was appropriate to a half century ago, in 1955, for that year furnished the basic data for the formula for the very first poverty measure. Updated thereafter only for inflation, the poverty line lost all connection over time with current consumption patterns of the average family. Quite a few families then didn't have their own private telephone, or a car, or even a mixer in their kitchen... The official poverty line has thus been allowed to fall substantially below a socially decent minimum, even though its intention was to measure such a minimum. ”

The issue of understating poverty is especially pressing in states with both a high cost of living and a high poverty rate such as California where the median home price in May 2006 was determined to be $564,430.[48] With half of all homes being priced above the half million dollar mark and prices in urban areas such as San Francisco, San Jose or Los Angeles being higher than the state average, it is almost impossible for not just the poor but also lower middle class worker to afford decent housing[citation needed], and no possibility of home ownership. In the Monterey area, where the low-pay industry of agriculture is the largest sector in the economy and the majority of the population lacks a college education the median home price was determined to be $723,790, requiring an upper middle class income which only roughly 20% of all households in the county boast.[48][49]

Such fluctuations in local markets are however not considered in the Federal poverty threshold and thus leave many who live in poverty-like conditions out of the total number of households classified as poor.





NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 2, 2011 4:58 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Then there's homelessness, which is difficult to calculate because not everyone utilizes shelters, etc. Nonetheless, it speaks to poverty in the US. I can tell you for certain that I saw few homeless people in the past than I see now...FAR fewer. And a few decades ago we didn't even HAVE homeless people in Marin; now I see them daily and know where several encampments are. Are they counted among the poor, I wonder? And if the number of poor truly hasn't changed so much, why are so many homeless, why has there been such an increase in homeless FAMILIES with kids?



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
A.I Artificial Intelligence AI
Sat, December 21, 2024 19:06 - 256 posts
Hollywood exposes themselves as the phony whores they are
Sat, December 21, 2024 18:55 - 69 posts
Elections; 2024
Sat, December 21, 2024 18:29 - 4989 posts
Music II
Sat, December 21, 2024 18:22 - 135 posts
WMD proliferation the spread of chemical and bio weapons, as of the collapse of Syria
Sat, December 21, 2024 18:15 - 3 posts
A thread for Democrats Only
Sat, December 21, 2024 18:11 - 6965 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Sat, December 21, 2024 17:58 - 4901 posts
TERRORISM EXPANDS TO GERMANY ... and the USA, Hungary, and Sweden
Sat, December 21, 2024 15:20 - 36 posts
Ellen Page is a Dude Now
Sat, December 21, 2024 15:00 - 242 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Sat, December 21, 2024 14:48 - 978 posts
Who hates Israel?
Sat, December 21, 2024 13:45 - 81 posts
French elections, and France in general
Sat, December 21, 2024 13:43 - 187 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL